Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

FDA Moves to Ban All Menthol Cigarettes and Flavored Cigars

fda.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 273 posts

Re: FDA Moves to Ban All Menthol Cigarettes and Flavored Cigars

#231

Post by sangnoir »

austincheney wrote: post #131
bobbyi_settv wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As the press release says, menthol was "the last allowable flavor". It's not the government banning one specific flavor because it is popular with black people. It is the government first banning every flavor except the one popular with black people and now circling back to make the rules uniform.

No, the press release does specifically target black people: > One studyExternal Link Disclaimer suggests that banning menthol cigarettes in the U.S. would lead an additional 923,000 smokers to quit, including 230,000 African Americans in the first 13 to 17 months after a ban goes into effect. An earlier studyExternal Link Disclaimer projected that about 633,000 deaths would be averted, including about 237,000 deaths…

> Then they go on to rationalize those positions about African Americans because that progress hasn’t been experienced by everyone equally

I don't see any rationalizations - here are the basic facts:

1. Menthol is the last flavor that's available for sale

2. Black people are extremely over-represented among smokers of menthol cigarettes.

Stating that banning of other flavors (except Menthol!) didn't have a proportionate effect among black smokers is not rationalization - that's just a fact. I don't know why anyone would be uncomfortable with this. The reason Menthol is being banned is not because its popular among black people (which is what gp asserted and you appear to be opposing).

Re: FDA Moves to Ban All Menthol Cigarettes and Flavored Cigars

#232

Post by drak0n1c »

BitwiseFool wrote: post #126
chmod600 wrote: post #32

At what point do we say that we've just given up on the concept of freedom? For what behaviors will we say: "That's a really bad idea, but go ahead and suffer the consequences if you want to do it"? It seems we are moving in the direction of zero consequences first. By the time you have medical bills from smoking too much, you're on medicare, so it's not coming out of your children's inheritance. And then after the c…

Oddly enough smoking actually saves the State money in the long run. Smoking citizens don't live as long and thus save money on medical care and entitlement payments.

Financially, isn't the even bigger factor the large amount of sin taxes smokers pay into the system over their lifetime? I read that it is usually more than the added healthcare cost.

Re: FDA Moves to Ban All Menthol Cigarettes and Flavored Cigars

#233

Post by duped »

whatshisface wrote: post #227
duped wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Consequently, vice taxes are always either ineffectual, or a ban that only applies to the poor. A 10% increase in tobacco price results in a 4% decrease in tobacco demand: https://www.who.int/tobacco/economics/taxation/en/ I don't know if that counts as "ineffectual" in your book, but its not nothing.

Hence the second half of the branch: "or a ban that applies only to the poor."

Couldn't you say the same of all luxury products?

Re: FDA Moves to Ban All Menthol Cigarettes and Flavored Cigars

#234

Post by jimmygrapes »

the_lonely_road wrote: post #170
ketzo wrote: post #4

I’m extremely in favor of harm-reduction legislation in general, and I think this ban is a good idea overall. Flavors are effective at hooking young people in particular — lots of vaping research has shown that — and so get it outta here. Great. But man, “ban menthols because Black people like them” sure feels a little weird. Like, I get that’s not exactly what’s going on. But.. it’s a little bit what’s going on? I g…

I don’t buy into the ban having racist roots but I am concerned about the result of the ban increasing race problems. There was a famous case in the past few years of a big black guy being killed during a police interaction and the underlying reason for the interaction was that he was selling loose cigarettes on the street. Prohibition and the failed drug war have shown us that making something illegal won’t stop dem…

>unless menthols can't be duplicated

A drop of mint flavoring from the baking aisle at the nearest store on the filter, and a few drops on the unflavored pipe tobacco. It ain't the same, but nobody's gonna complain when the alternative is raw.

Re: FDA Moves to Ban All Menthol Cigarettes and Flavored Cigars

#235

Post by whatshisface »

duped wrote: post #233
whatshisface wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hence the second half of the branch: "or a ban that applies only to the poor."

Couldn't you say the same of all luxury products?

If they're expensive because policy set the prices then yes, that would be a ban.

Re: FDA Moves to Ban All Menthol Cigarettes and Flavored Cigars

#236

Post by jolux »

olyjohn wrote: post #220
jolux wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Nobody smokes because it tastes good, menthol or not. I was just talking with some online friends yesterday who smoke and say they would never have started if it weren't for menthols, so I think you're wrong about this.

Yes but most cigarettes are not menthols. And a good portion of the people I know who smoke hate menthols... so there's that anecdote. I only know one person who smokes menthols, and the rest just smoke regular cigarettes and did not start by smoking menthols.

It might not be what gets the majority of people, but clearly it gets some, and the parent said "nobody."

I will also note that my friends started when they were teens and no longer smoke menthols.

Re: FDA Moves to Ban All Menthol Cigarettes and Flavored Cigars

#237

Post by sangnoir »

fitzie wrote: post #218
Gatsky wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are banning sale, not use. It seems totally reasonable to say we don’t want anyone to profit from selling highly addictive health damaging products. This is ok. Your argument boils down to “I want the right to poison myself and the convenience to do it at easily accessible retail outlets.” The suggestion that we should restrict healthcare based on the degree to which a person is culpable for their disease is a t…

Eric Garner was killed because of the policies that created the a huge black market for cigarettes in NYC. the absurdity is they are banning flavor which isn't the harmful element. at the same time they are legalizing marijuana including edibles across this country. in a free country you have to allow people the liberty to make poor choices. putting out health information and reasonable restrictions is as far as the…

> Eric Garner was killed because of the policies that created the a huge black market for cigarettes in NYC

I don't think that's why he was killed.

Re: FDA Moves to Ban All Menthol Cigarettes and Flavored Cigars

#238

Post by BurningFrog »

olyjohn wrote: post #219
BurningFrog wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. Smoking citizens are - on average - productive until retirement, but use up much less pension money. So the cynical policy would be the opposite. 2. When you increase taxes you get smuggling and illegal dealing with all the violence it brings.

Doesn't banning something also give you smuggling and illegal dealing? Like currently all drugs and back when alcohol was illegal?

It does. You can think of a ban as an infinite tax.

Re: FDA Moves to Ban All Menthol Cigarettes and Flavored Cigars

#239

Post by User23 »

bsder wrote: post #229
gburdell3 wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Flavors aren't effective at hooking young people, nicotine is. Nobody smokes because it tastes good, menthol or not. This is just another ban that makes some people feel good about themselves while pissing off the rest. I lean pretty far left, but this is the kind of meaningless ban that makes people hate Democrats.

> Flavors aren't effective at hooking young people, nicotine is. Wrong. Flavors are simply really effective at hooking everybody . I watched this with a friend of mine who absolutely thought the same way as you. We got him a couple different flavored ones to try--all non-nicotine. His reaction: "Alright, you win. You have to physically take the strawberry ones away as I will absolutely drain them all." The flavors al…

Given that the entire modern tech business is addiction as a service, I don't think we have any room for moral grandstanding.

Remember when Internet addiction was a big concern?

Re: FDA Moves to Ban All Menthol Cigarettes and Flavored Cigars

#240

Post by __blockcipher__ »

nicoburns wrote: post #182
__blockcipher__ wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Socialized medicine by definition increases healthcare costs because it divorces the person creating the cost from bearing the results. This applies in basically every socialist system not just socialized medicine. It’s also worth mentioning that public health awareness campaigns frequently stretch the science in the quest to moralize more effectively. Case in point: saturated fats, pretending everyone is equally vul…

> Socialized medicine by definition increases healthcare costs because it divorces the person creating the cost from bearing the results Then why are healthcare costs in the UK (socialised) and Europe (typically private, but highly regulated with a social option) dramatically lower than US (private) healthcare costs despite similar levels of care? Unless you have evidence that it increases costs, I would suggest that…

> Then why are healthcare costs in the UK (socialised) and Europe (typically private, but highly regulated with a social option) dramatically lower than US (private) healthcare costs despite similar levels of care?

They don’t have similar levels of care, that’s why. Wait times are longer and the care is overall of lower quality.

It’s also hard to compare countries directly. In the USA we have a big “underclass” of very unhealthy people (that falls along both socioeconomic and racial lines), which the countries you’re pointing out largely don’t.

Post reply on HN